Hey all you 'aces' - read the OP - no-one is talking about 'raw data' flying! The incident I am reading about involves 'difficulty' flying on the Stdby AH
Steady the Buffs, BOAC
if squinting at the small standby ADI is not raw data, I don't know what is..
Nevertheless, I bet my left ball withered though it may be, very few pilots will ask their simulator instructor if he minds if they practice flying on the standby ADI just to keep in practice. Most will avoid it like a plague because they know they will f..k up in front of the instructor. It is a fact of life in discussions like this on Pprune that generalisations are inevitable. Otherwise Pprune would just be blank pages since most of us do not know what really happened in these sort of incidents until the official report surfaces a year or more later.
A competent crew member will make bloody sure he remains up to scratch on basic instrument flying - one way or another. Reading through some of these replies it is self evident that there are captains out there scared fartless of letting their first officers hand fly "raw data" (ie no FD)
On the other hand I too have offered my co-joe the opportunity to practice raw data while line flying and the majority say thanks- but no thanks. Why is this so? It's a generational thing I believe like wearing base ball caps on the side or back to front as well as dark sunnies over the scone at night. It is called technical arrogance - or simply can't be bothered, Mate.
Seems to me from reading the Flight International report on the RJ incident, the crew were out of their depth with a relatively simple instrument failure. Or as the report put it "the captain was overburdened"
Nonsense. As the commander of his flight he simply displayed gross technical incompetence.